Vinomofo Wine Deals

[beefarmer]

This is not my area of professional expertise, but a quick Google of 'laws on RRP' popped up with a Government Consumer website saying the following:


If you compare prices in your advertising to attract customers with possible savings, make sure you aren't misleading them.
For example, if you're having a sale, you might compare the sale price of your product or service to:

• the previous higher price
• a competitor's price
• the recommended retail price (RRP).

You may be misleading your customers if:

• your product or service was not sold at the previous higher price for a 'reasonable period' before your sale
• you compare your price to the price of a competitor who is in a different area or country
• the product or service on sale has never been sold at the RRP.

What's considered a 'reasonable period' will vary in each case. But if you can't show sales at the previous higher price, then it's likely you're misleading your customers.
Avoid breaching the law

When you make statements about prices, including in your advertisements and when talking to your customers, take the time to get it right.
It's illegal to make false or misleading statements about the price of products or services.

That looks pretty clear to me. Putting the wine to one side - to my mind, I am personally comfortable with the taste experience and $20 odd price paid. BUT ...

I truly hope the RRP was not made up to generate the headline discount, and there was a [genuine and] reasonable period when the Cantiniere was offered for sale at its RRP (it was my guess that the delay to shipment was to do this, but that's a pure guess, although I didn't see any of us spot it up for sale with Mitolo or elsewhere).

Although I am not the sort of person to be outraged by a misguided [how do you put it ...], I would start to see the Fo in a very different light and would probably place my hard earned wine purchases elsewhere if this was a regular occurrence, whatever the fantastic offerings I would miss out on.

Has anybody formally written to the Fo seeking an explanation on the Cantiniere? I am curious. The brokers play the ignorant card when you plug them for info on this wine.

The Cantiniere is what it is, and that's a marketing exercise between Vinomofo and the winery.
No different to what Woolworths or Coles offers in their produce.
But .......

 

[Wozza]

Reading past posts about the Mother Vine it looks well liked by AFFers, I'm tempted but I usually go for the likes of the Glenlofty and Amelia Park at bargain basement prices.
I received a bottle of the Hewitson Ned & Henry's shiraz in a salvation case and I loved it and I see that the Mother Vine is about twice the price of the Ned & Henry. Did we ever see a VM re-stock of their Ned & Henry?

I have been looking out for the Ned & Henry too. It was the wine that finally broke the Dan Murphys / BWS / First Choice etc., etc. camels back. It wasn't the sort of run of the mill wine that you usually pay $20 odd bucks for on your way to a dinner party, as you scan the many aisles looking for medals, fancy labels, anything to help you make that in store decision.

In terms of the Mother Vine, and probably the majority of the reds in the next price bracket up from the Glenlofty's etc., you will be buying them young. They will taste just fine with a bit of airing (some more than others), but really they need time to develop in the bottle to get the most out of them as the maker intended. That's certainly the case with the Mother Vine (and the Amelia Reserves).

The Mother Vine is a really good wine, just a tiny fraction off the Amelia Reserve CS in my humble opinion (that's because I prefer the more subtle but complex reds). But if you like your reds a bit bigger, then you will possibly prefer the Mother Vine over the Amelia Reserve Shiraz. I described the Mother Vine on my Vivino review as "...it's got lovely fruit power and elegance all in one sip. Highly recommended."

I would hazard a guess that if you like the Amelia's, you won't be disappointed with taking a (96 point) punt on the Mother Vine.

 

[Jadranska]

I agree, for a $20 wine its quite good and worth keeping.
Night three for my bottle and it seems to keep improving.

Can't be that good if it made it to night 3!

 

[Jadranska]

Tonights wine – Belgravia 2012 “The Belgravia” Cabernet Sauvignon (Orange)

Purchased as part of the recent BoomBox mixed dozen.

I found this wine very challenging to evaluate. It is an example of a more austere Cabernet style (cool climate?) that I’m as yet not overly familiar with.

An elegant Cabernet with a strong blackcurrant and herbal bouquet with a hint of mint and some volatile mineralality showing through.

Medium bodied. Some fruit sweetness on the front of the palette quickly giving way to slightly bitter and grippy tannins, with an astringent stemmy finish. Layers of blackcurrant and dark chocolate lead to a spicy acidity predominating over any residual sweetness. There is good complexity and length to the finish, but I find myself fighting that astringency. The wine tasted much more balanced with food than without, but needed plenty of breathing time to properly open up.

There are no obvious faults in the wine, although it is not a style that immediately endears itself to me. I found the wine more enjoyable the longer I had to come to terms with its complexity. It would probably cellar very well, but I don’t know that it would find a place in my limited cellar space.

Thanks for your review. I had the BoomBox too and found the Belgravia pretty ok, I love cooler region wines!

 

[Glider_]

Thanks Wozza, that's exactly the kind of reply I was hoping for. I really enjoy reading the thoughts of the better-drank (drunk?) AFFers, they're a great help to the lurkers like me.

 

[Brittain23]

oooh look, a "brand new" Barossa Cabernet! $30 down to $12, Any Ideas? I haven't cracked this one yet...

 

[blackcat20]

This is not my area of professional expertise, but a quick Google of 'laws on RRP' popped up with a Government Consumer website saying the following:


If you compare prices in your advertising to attract customers with possible savings, make sure you aren't misleading them.
For example, if you're having a sale, you might compare the sale price of your product or service to:

• the previous higher price
• a competitor's price
• the recommended retail price (RRP).

You may be misleading your customers if:

• your product or service was not sold at the previous higher price for a 'reasonable period' before your sale
• you compare your price to the price of a competitor who is in a different area or country
• the product or service on sale has never been sold at the RRP.

What's considered a 'reasonable period' will vary in each case. But if you can't show sales at the previous higher price, then it's likely you're misleading your customers.
Avoid breaching the law

When you make statements about prices, including in your advertisements and when talking to your customers, take the time to get it right.
It's illegal to make false or misleading statements about the price of products or services.

That looks pretty clear to me. Putting the wine to one side - to my mind, I am personally comfortable with the taste experience and $20 odd price paid. BUT ...

I truly hope the RRP was not made up to generate the headline discount, and there was a [genuine and] reasonable period when the Cantiniere was offered for sale at its RRP (it was my guess that the delay to shipment was to do this, but that's a pure guess, although I didn't see any of us spot it up for sale with Mitolo or elsewhere).

Although I am not the sort of person to be outraged by a misguided [how do you put it ...], I would start to see the Fo in a very different light and would probably place my hard earned wine purchases elsewhere if this was a regular occurrence, whatever the fantastic offerings I would miss out on.

Has anybody formally written to the Fo seeking an explanation on the Cantiniere? I am curious. The brokers play the ignorant card when you plug them for info on this wine.

As far as I'm aware it was never for sale on the Mitolo website; it displayed "sold out" every time I looked... Mitolo themselves (on Instagram) have referred to it as a "small batch shiraz". I think VM are on pretty shakey ground with this one if it has not been sold anywhere for the RRP...

Can't be that good if it made it to night 3!

No need to drink it all in one go, I quite enjoyed savouring it over a few evenings.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

oooh look, a "brand new" Barossa Cabernet! $30 down to $12, Any Ideas? I haven't cracked this one yet...

Saltram Pepperjack Cab Sauv?

 

[Brittain23]

Saltram Pepperjack Cab Sauv?

Actually had a bottle of that over the weekend! How did that slip my mind?
Wonder if they will have any of their shiraz...

 

[Dr Ralph]

Saltram Pepperjack Cab Sauv?

PH doesn't match.

https://www.pepperjack.com.au/~/med...ack-Cabernet-Sauvignon-2012-Tasting-Notes.pdf

 

[pilatus]

Saltram Pepperjack Cab Sauv?

good drop...but good deal at DM at the moment
5 + 1 bottle of certified for $99 less cash rewards and ...no freight if you pick up

 

[AnonymousCoward]

PH doesn't match.

https://www.pepperjack.com.au/~/med...ack-Cabernet-Sauvignon-2012-Tasting-Notes.pdf

Just to make I understand your point, you're saying that the3.55pH in that PDF doesn't match the 3.53pH on the VM site? Technically that's true I guess.

 

[roshea]

Just to make I understand your point, you're saying that the3.55pH in that PDF doesn't match the 3.53pH on the VM site? Technically that's true I guess.

Certainly that's within the normal mof_ margin of error for facts and figures. The other details match up apart from the price - where is it available for $30? I couldn't find any sales link on the Pepperjack web site, and RRP is listed at up to $35.99 elsewhere.

 

[Dr Ralph]

Certainly that's within the normal mof_ margin of error for facts and figures.

Be careful roshea, according to some members of this thread, VM can do no wrong/have never engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct. According to those same members it's not acceptable for you to suggest that they may have made an error, deliberate or otherwise lest you be bullied into being quite on the matter.


However it's clear to me that if the PH from the official source and the VM site aren't the same then this is a mistake, deliberate or otherwise, and therefore is misleading/deceptive conduct. Either that or it simply can't be the pepperjack as I suggested in post #6190.

 

[redbigot]

Saltram Pepperjack Cab Sauv?

Not Pepperjack, there is another wine that matches the score and tech specs exactly.

It's a little hard to find on the Wine Companion site due to their cough data model/integrity.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

However it's clear to me that if the PH from the official source and the VM site aren't the same then this is a mistake, deliberate or otherwise, it's misleading/deceptive conduct.

First you have to establish what the actual pH is. Then you can state which figure is in error. Then you can point figures. Until then can we stick to figuring out what the wine is, please?

If you really think this is misleading or deceptive conduct, then swear out a complaint or take them to court.

Back on topic: anyone know what the Hunter Semillon is? I've got a few matches, but not for the 120 years in business bit.

 

[jabba]

First you have to establish what the actual pH is. Then you can state which figure is in error. Then you can point figures. Until then can we stick to figuring out what the wine is, please?

If you really think this is misleading or deceptive conduct, then swear out a complaint or take them to court.

Back on topic: anyone know what the Hunter Semillon is? I've got a few matches, but not for the 120 years in business bit.

Semillon is Mount Pleasant Eight Acres

 

[Dr Ralph]

Then you can point figures.

I'm sorry but this does not make any sense to me.

First you have to establish what the actual pH is.

I assume you don't have the ability to follow a provided URL link or you couldn't read the posts for yourself.

VM state the PH is 3.53

Pepperjack state the PH is 3.55

These are different numbers.

Hence it is not pepperjack as I have already indicated several times.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

I assume you don't have the ability to follow a provided URL link or you couldn't read the posts for yourself.

VM state the PH is 3.53

Pepperjack state the PH is 3.55

These are different numbers.

Hence it is not pepperjack as I have already indicated several times.

Sure you did. Didn't you see me agreeing with you in post 6192? LOL

 

[AnonymousCoward]

Not Pepperjack, there is another wine that matches the score and tech specs exactly.

It's a little hard to find on the Wine Companion site due to their cough data model/integrity.

St Hallett (The Reward)? Though pH is, likewise, a bit out. Does the pH match exactly?